After Chud went out of his way to tell Josh they weren't going to trade him, if it happens now, there's apparently some pretty serious disconnect between Chud & JoeBs and/or Chud's inviting a credibility problem in the locker room.

Unless SF gives up their 1st, which isn't what's being rumored, I don't think. But if they did, I suppose you could sell "Whoaz, they blew us out of the water and stuff."

The only way that isn't a colossal mistake is if they know of some impending suspension that no one else does.

ETA - Saw elsewhere that the offer involved a 2, a 4, and Kendall Hunter. I still don't do it, but not sure I'd be putting my shotgun in my mouth either. Hunter is pretty good and still fairly young, and a 2 and a 4 aren't terrible (in the hands of competent drafters).

That might matter to the people who fill Muni at 7am but it shouldn't matter to Lombanner.

This team has as good a chance of finishing 3-13 as they do finishing in first place, given the quarterbacking situation.

And again, Gordon is a solid player. Explosive, exciting, etc. But he ain't Julio Jones or Larry Fitzgerald in terms of work ethic, off field issues, suspension status or play. I'd deal him if the deal is right. San Fran may be getting desperate for a deep threat (or two when Crabtree gets back). They might legitimately be that one player away and the 28th pick wouldn't phase them.

We'll see. But it wouldn't bother me to see the ticking time bomb blow up far, far away. Because it is most definitely just a question of when.

That might matter to the people who fill Muni at 7am but it shouldn't matter to Lombanner.

This team has as good a chance of finishing 3-13 as they do finishing in first place, given the quarterbacking situation.

And again, Gordon is a solid player. Explosive, exciting, etc. But he ain't Julio Jones or Larry Fitzgerald in terms of work ethic, off field issues, suspension status or play. I'd deal him if the deal is right. San Fran may be getting desperate for a deep threat (or two when Crabtree gets back). They might legitimately be that one player away and the 28th pick wouldn't phase them.

We'll see. But it wouldn't bother me to see the ticking time bomb blow up far, far away. Because it is most definitely just a question of when.

I don't disagree.

Just pointing out that if people thought they were tanking when they traded a fairly mediocre RB...

And talk about torpedoing Weeden - he's doing that well enough on his own without assistance.

I don't think he was too thrilled with Chud in Carolina..so it just doesn't seem like a fit.

What are we giving up for him? Is he at least as good/better as some of the prospects in this years draft?

If Carolina is literally dangling him for a 2nd rounder, then you got to go for him. Too much value right there.

He's better than Weeds at least, I can say that. Did you guys seat that quote from Gordon on him?

Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

peeker643 wrote:I hope not. I'd be really leery of a 3rd yr "Franchise" QB an org is willing to give up for two #1 picks (one of which that might end up being basically a 2nd). I mean, how elite can that guy be?

I guess I can see Chud loving him, but I'm w/HooDoo on not forcing the issue and taking my next QB in the flow of the draft.

But if we were fully committed to jumping into a read-option based offense, he's the one guy who's probably worth it.

I hope not. I'd be really leery of a 3rd yr "Franchise" QB an org is willing to give up for two #1 picks (one of which that might end up being basically a 2nd). I mean, how elite can that guy be?

I guess I can see Chud loving him, but I'm w/HooDoo on not forcing the issue and taking my next QB in the flow of the draft.

I can see that point about trading for a QB that a team is willing to trade (the ol' "I don't want to be part of any club that would have me as a member" idea), but Cam has a history in the NFL with Chud, and it was basically successful. He has all the physical tools, still young... hell yeah I'd trade two 1's for him.

That one from Indy looks like it'll be late in the round, and, you put Cam on this team ours might be in the 20's too.

ETA - I would be floored if Carolina actually dealt him. Just flabbergasted.

I mean the type of QB I want on the Browns roster by next year is a Cam Newton/RG3-type.

They have a defense now, and there's enough talent on offense to get him by. They also have one of the great offensive coordinators in history on the sideline, so that would help quite a bit in his development.

If it's hypothetically for our 1st, a 3rd, and I don't know...Greg Little? Then yeah..I'd take it.

Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

peeker643 wrote:I hope not. I'd be really leery of a 3rd yr "Franchise" QB an org is willing to give up for two #1 picks (one of which that might end up being basically a 2nd). I mean, how elite can that guy be?

I guess I can see Chud loving him, but I'm w/HooDoo on not forcing the issue and taking my next QB in the flow of the draft.

But if we were fully committed to jumping into a read-option based offense, he's the one guy who's probably worth it.

Wow, that was well done. I saw C&C do halftime at a Cavs game a few years back. Despite them continually imploring anyone willing to listen, very few people danced now.

Im with Hiko, I think if we can get Cam for our #1's you have to do it. I think a lot of the guys coming out in the draft are hopeing to have the upside that Cam has proven to have. I don't see how you pass that up.

But that makes the Gordon rumors even more confusing. You are going to give up your 1's for Cam and then turn around and trade one of only 2 real offensive threats for a 2nd? Makes no sense unless they really expect Gordon will be taking a long furlough in the near future. Hard for any of us outsiders to tell how real of a concern that is.

This is pretty much the debate at Berea over Cam Newton (if the trade is real).

Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

peeker643 wrote:I hope not. I'd be really leery of a 3rd yr "Franchise" QB an org is willing to give up for two #1 picks (one of which that might end up being basically a 2nd). I mean, how elite can that guy be?

I guess I can see Chud loving him, but I'm w/HooDoo on not forcing the issue and taking my next QB in the flow of the draft.

But if we were fully committed to jumping into a read-option based offense, he's the one guy who's probably worth it.

peeker643 wrote:I hope not. I'd be really leery of a 3rd yr "Franchise" QB an org is willing to give up for two #1 picks (one of which that might end up being basically a 2nd). I mean, how elite can that guy be?

I guess I can see Chud loving him, but I'm w/HooDoo on not forcing the issue and taking my next QB in the flow of the draft.

But if we were fully committed to jumping into a read-option based offense, he's the one guy who's probably worth it.

HoodooMan wrote:Which is part of what makes Cam such an attractive option in that offense. Him being as big or bigger than most of the players tackling him and all.

^bringing it back around

We saw what this offense looks like with even just "competent" QB play. Imagine it being with someone who's able to make plays when something is broken down, or that doesn't just take sacks like Weeds does.

Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

HoodooMan wrote:Which is part of what makes Cam such an attractive option in that offense. Him being as big or bigger than most of the players tackling him and all.

^bringing it back around

Not saying there aren't guys better suited to run it than others. Cam being the poster boy. I'm saying the lifespan of those who run it will be closer to the historic lifespan of RB than QB.

Problem with Cam, IMO, isn't durability. It's the fact he had success before defenses adjusted and he's since regressed for two straight seasons. And no, the situation in Carolina hasn't helped that. But the situation in Carolina blew when he was a rookie setting the league on its ear too.

Cam has showed me no reason in the last two seasons to consider him an elite QB. He has the size, arm, etc. But he's lacking something, whether it be ability to read and adjust to the fronts he's seeing or his reluctance to just throw balls away and live to play another down.

"I think the way to stop [read-option] is to hit the quarterback on every play, and, after a while, he's gonna get tired of being hit. And, he's gonna say to the coach, don't call that anymore.

As they get older, they say NO MAS! I don't wanna it anymore."

Polian also referenced a quote from former Raiders quarterback Rich Gannon: "There are no old, mobile quarterbacks."

Care to find any more old school useless sacks to trot out? Gunther Cunningham and BIll Polian? Was Steve Marriuchi busy?

And show me the QBs that can actually throw and have been hurt running the read option this year?

We have.....

Zero.

Vick is made of glass and has been hurt inside, outside, next to, on top of and underneath the pocket.

On if I'm playing TPeezy and his shit arm you can bet your ass I am playing to hurt him for running. Read Option = QB death if the QB can't throw well enough to keep players out of the box. Never said it didn't.

So carry on, maybe Mike Holmgren is available to tell you how dangerous it is to run as well. I hear he's got a great and relevant football mind.

peeker643 wrote:It's the fact he had success before defenses adjusted and he's since regressed for two straight seasons.

This is just 100% patently wrong.

Cam struggled through roughly the first half or so of last year when Chud was far too fancy with the scheme and was calling way too many set QB runs. Once Chud stopped with the micro-managing and let Cam play in the 2nd half Cam went nuts.

(also, the world isn't black and white like Peeker pretends, running the read option 5-10 times a game isn't killing anyone and is impacting the way the defense plays the game enough to force a change in the DEs responsibilities. I'm not sure how advocating for occasional usage of a play became "WE'RE GONNA RUN OUR QB LIKE OUR RBS!@$#!$!" in Peeker's World)

"I think the way to stop [read-option] is to hit the quarterback on every play, and, after a while, he's gonna get tired of being hit. And, he's gonna say to the coach, don't call that anymore.

As they get older, they say NO MAS! I don't wanna it anymore."

Polian also referenced a quote from former Raiders quarterback Rich Gannon: "There are no old, mobile quarterbacks."

Care to find any more old school useless sacks to trot out? Gunther Cunningham and BIll Polian? Was Steve Marriuchi busy?

And show me the QBs that can actually throw and have been hurt running the read option this year?

We have.....

Zero.

Vick is made of glass and has been hurt inside, outside, next to, on top of and underneath the pocket.

On if I'm playing TPeezy and his shit arm you can bet your ass I am playing to hurt him for running. Read Option = QB death if the QB can't throw well enough to keep players out of the box. Never said it didn't.

So carry on, maybe Mike Holmgren is available to tell you how dangerous it is to run as well. I hear he's got a great and relevant football mind.

There's no need, dude. We have you.

It's like having Google on the boards. You have all the answers and expertise. And if you don't you just put conditions in after being called out or corrected (Vick is glass and TP is ass...blah..blah..blah..) You dodn't want to cite your experts who say that running the Read-Option won't get QBs hurt? Maybe a young, hipster type like a Harbaugh who's been pettioning the league to ban those hits because, I guess, he finds hitting is too tyrannical and oppressive and doesn't fit with a civilized culture.

And if you can throw it well enough you don't need the read-option. Which is why Kap, RG3 and Wilson won't ever run it more than they did last year and why I don't want Cam simply because he's bigger than others.

Simple physics and probability. If I never get in a plane the odds I die in a plane crash are probably lower, right? But what if I fly every day, all day!!!!!????? I mean, create a spreadsheet and use some algoriithms or something. You're good with those, no?

I can't explain it anymore than that. You've never looked dumber with a take on these boards than this one. I implore you to ask someone that played the game, anyone, to teach you how a spread offense really works.

And if you are trotting Vick and TPeezy out as your examples, well, good on you for grasping at straws. Limited use of a concept to force additional responsibilities on the defense is not going to go away because you found someone who was last good at their job in 1994 to back you up.

Fuck Peeker, you really need to just stop on this one. I've played the game enough to actually understand how defense works, you haven't so you just yell about people hitting people and act like I'm advocating running QBs to death. Responsibilities forced upon a defense, even just five times a game, can drastically change a game.

Maybe I should put this in 1994 terms that you'll understand. Remember half back draws and how popular they were when the shotgun was a new idea?

Harbaugh explained that he was concerned that defenders would hit quarterbacks in the knee or head with an excuse that they couldn't tell if the QB had the ball and could be considered a running back.

"By definition, a fake is a deception," Harbaugh said, continuing to voice his concern. "It is a deception, deceptive maneuver....Now are they opened up to being hit in the head and the knees, treated like a running back?...It seems like they would have more of an appetite to look at that, and they've said they don't have an appetite to look at it any further."

OMG- Not....not....not....... treated like a RB..../Halloween scream

NFL defenses have spent the offseason working on ways to combat the read option. And after talking with many coaches and players this summer, the consensus is that the quarterbacks will take many more shots this season when they run the read-option, including when they play out the fakes.

I'll see if I can research how old the coaches and the players are. I probably won't be able to tell if the players are actually "old souls" with classic values as opposed to nuanced, cutting edge cats.

"When these guys carry out the fakes, and don't show that they don't have the ball, they are going to get hit," one NFC coach said. "I think that's what defenses will be designed to do. He's got it tucked down off play action like he has it he's going to get hits."

Really praying this NFC coach isn't Gunther Cunningham or I lose all credibility. I'm gonna pretend it's Rocky Seco from the Seahawks cuz he's like 37 and he lives in Seattle so...hip...duh...

"I wouldn't want to be a read-option quarterback," one NFC defensive end said. "They're going to get smacked."

"Smacked" doesn't help here. Could be a fatherly type or could be a young dude. Still, it's DE so likely no older than 32 or so.

This has become such a concern with some teams that use the read-option that they've talked with the NFL officiating department about how they will police the hits.

The rule states that if the quarterback is carrying out a fake, he can be hit. If he shows he doesn't have the ball, he is off-limits. The San Francisco 49ers, who run read-option with Colin Kaepernick, have already talked with the league about this, according to one source.

It's a smart move. They want to protect their franchise player.

"You can hit him," another NFC coach said. "And we will. The Ravens tried it in the Super Bowl with their ends, but they didn't really hit him. This time, people are going to hit those guys. Those hits are like body blows by a puncher in a fight. They will help take the air out of them, wear them down. They can be effective."

This is good because it says, "another NFC coach". That infers it's not the same as the first one quoted but it ensures THAT ONE OF THEM ISN'T GUNTHER CUNNINGHAM!!!!!!!

^ still has literally zero to do with my post. But apparently you've now taken your POV on this to a point where you are just going to answer like I'm advocating running 20 read option plays a game no matter what I type, so there is that.

And man, Harbough asked for more lenient rules!!!?!!!! No coach has ever done that before!@$!$!!! Polian and Peyton certainly didn't get the NFL to disallow covering WRs because they cried!$!!!?!!

Geezes fucking christ Peeker, you really are a dumb shit at this juncture. You just pick an argument and beat it to death without ever evaluating any potential for middle ground.

e0y2e3 wrote:^ really, truly, has no idea what the x's and o's behind defense are.

I can't explain it anymore than that. You've never looked dumber with a take on these boards than this one. I implore you to ask someone that played the game, anyone, to teach you how a spread offense really works.

And if you are trotting Vick and TPeezy out as your examples, well, good on you for grasping at straws. Limited use of a concept to force additional responsibilities on the defense is not going to go away because you found someone who was last good at their job in 1994 to back you up.

Fuck Peeker, you really need to just stop on this one. I've played the game enough to actually understand how defense works, you haven't so you just yell about people hitting people and act like I'm advocating running QBs to death. Responsibilities forced upon a defense, even just five times a game, can drastically change a game.

Maybe I should put this in 1994 terms that you'll understand. Remember half back draws and how popular they were when the shotgun was a new idea?

So you quit? Just say that. Because you're pulling out the old, "I played the game at ....." and "You look bad on this one, son..so do yourself a favor.."

Now we have your "5 times a game condition" and the obliteration of the point.

No shit it changes the game dramatically. That's the whole fucking point of killing the asshole that can change it.

Stop trying to win a fuking argument that's not being made. The point has always been that while it's effective it's not conducive to keeping the few guys who can run it effectively alive for long.

Jesus you're a piece of work.

Quit bastardizing what was said to fit your argument. It makes you look like a bigger dickhead than usual.

I've written, literally hundreds of times that the read option will only work as a part of an offense Peeker.

Just because you choose to not read the argument I'm making so you can be a fuck that runs around and posts about running QBs as if they are running backs be my guest, but feel free to go back through my 50 or so posts on the subject.

I'm not bastardizing anything, my point from day one is that the read option is in the NFL for good and it is. You're the only person here who ever said anything about running it 100x (besides me pointing out the Seattle still does and your answer being that "Russell Wilson is gonna get hurts, I swear!".

Maybe in 5-10 years your small head will be able to grasp that you don't have to run plays more than a few times a game to dramatically change the defense. If the DE spends the entire game waiting to kill a QB on the read option he's likely fucking up something else he is supposed to be doing.

Last edited by e0y2e3 on Tue Oct 08, 2013 1:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

e0y2e3 wrote:You know what, I see what you're saying and I understand the concerns. While we agree the read-option can have a big affect on a game and a defenseI get why you'd have to have concerns about teams defending it by killing the guy that runs it...

Yep. Agreed. I dig the stress it causes. But it's stressful for QBs to walk around in braces or boots for months too. And on the coaches that have to replace them.

there's more truth to this sarcastic comment than you would ever dare think about rationally, let alone consider.

Maybe there's a google search for that to make you a bona fide running QB expert?

And plane travel is statistically the safest mode of transportation. that's what I tell my self in turbulence between Our Fathers.

Maybe he's made of glass?

I know what you're saying and what Lee's saying in that regard, and I agree to an extent, but Hoyer ran the ball 100 times his last two seasons at MSU. And they didn't win enough for all those to be kneel downs. He knows (knew) how to run.

Yes, Hoyer ran bootlegs. Enough of them to make him a very good running QB!

Link?

Cuz before you said "Hoyer ran the ball as an ad hoc scrambler, nothing more, nothing less".

So, it was maybe a little more, a little less?

Anyway...I have an idea to test my theory.

I'd like you to stand in the drive way and let motherscratcher hit you with his car. We'll equate that to a hit in the pocket.

Then, after that, I want you to stand in the street with your back to traffic. Close your eyes. Some cars will pass by, but one won't. You won't know when it happens. That'll be the stationary blind side test.

Lastly, I want you to get a full head of steam and let moscratcher hit you with a car moving at ~ the same exact speed.

Let me know when that's done so we can process and analyze the data and formulate a hypothesis.